Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
Bit of a cheap one for the Independent to bring up now. It's not really news.
Still not top-notch journalism in my book but, then again, what in the Independent is these days...
All the old players are dropping out, starting families. Banks doesn't even tout anymore.
still a good start - first day on the job, settling down to his desk, being shown with the coffee and tea machine is, gets a nice new lanyard, IT hasn't quite set up his logins properly, checks his emails - BLAMMO!
if you read it rather than focussing on the headline
about this Sajid Javid fella. Fraser Nelson this morning is saying that he's the future of the Conservative party and all that.
Looking at his CV he sure does have a good back story and acute business acumen. Put his balls on the line last night on QT by saying there was no housing bubble in London though. That might come back to bite him on the arse if he has treasury/Chancellor ambitions.
although that might have been more about the policy he was trying to defend.
But it's a risky business putting him in the firing line of QT whilst being a very, very swift riser to the Cabinet. Pretty sure he lacks the requisite savvy to give the harmless answers required of him.
Kinda taking massive decisions all the time that have a huge effect on our economy.
I know QT is something different but you'd hope that someone who can rise far enough in politics to become economic and financial secretary can remember a few party lines and get themselves some media training.
PS He's been on Any Questions a couple of times in the last year and appears quite a bit on the Daily Politics.
They think that a black or Muslim parliamentary candidate or hypothetical party leader will draw thousands of votes from that particular background despite very little evidence this is what happen. In fact Tories have lost seats by putting up black candidates because the biggest effect seems to be that Tory voters don't like it and stay home.
But the party bigwigs and Fraser Nelsons believe that this is how the party will begin to dominate British politics once again. And the effect is they elevate people who aren't up to the job sometimes (Baroness Warsi anyone?)
Not sure if Javid is necessarily a poor performer but certain that the hype for him and others (Adam Afriye) is just wishful or simplistic thinking.
*cough* the British Obama *cough* Chuka Umunna *cough cough*
Chuka wrote that didn't he? On his Wikipedia?
The guy is also a pretty great politicians regardless of his race.
The Labour Party don't lose their shit because a politican happens to be black. If David Lammy was a Tory he'd have been in a very public role his entire career.
Has never been talked up by Labour as the future of the party because he can help Labour connect with ethnic minorities. Probably because the party feels like it already does relatively well with ethnic minorities compared to the other parties.
but I've found both parties are guilty of “talking up” their “minorities” (which, absurdly, still includes women) because it’s a superficial way to address the fact they haven’t made that much progress overall. The worst case scenario is it leads to people being over-promoted or over-burdened compared to their talent or experience and that doesn’t help anyone, least of all the individual concerned.
With regard to Chuka, I’ve found him massively underwhelming any time I’ve seen him in action or heard him speak to be honest. In fact, he was far worse than Javid last time I saw him on QT.
Labour has made huge progress on representation for women and (to a lesser extent) ethnic minorities. And I'm not just talking about the "Blair babes". Just look at the shadow Cabinet, the gender balance of candidates for the 2015 election and local governments across the UK.
There is no risk of overpromotion. Everyone in the shadow cabinets" deserves to be there. because Labour are a party that wants to increase representation for women and ethnic minorities from root to branch. So when Ed is looking around for talented MPs there are lots of them who are women or minority ethnic.
Its the Tories trying to keep up which is the main cause of overpromotion. When David Cameron is looking around for women or ethnic minority MPs to promotes there just isn't the talent there. And that's why she has had to one occasion promote people who just aren't up to the job.
David Cameron leads a party which is at best an inclusive at worst downright discriminatory.
At local government level and a candidate level as well as the House of Commons, women and minority ethnic candidates are not given support or are opposed because they don't fit with the notion of what a Tory Politican should look like.
Personally I'm sure that David Cameron finds this incredibly frustrating. But this is a sad fact of the party that he leads. And despite the rhetoric at the top and from commentators like Fraser Nelson, it doesn't seem like it's going to change any time soon.
the demographic make up of the Conservative party is very similar to the demographic make up of their voters (ie. they don't get a lot of women/ethnic minority votes).
Which one of these factors feeds the other is an interesting question.
Second generation and middle class Indian voters are relatively more Tory than other ethnic minority groups. This jumps much higher if they're self employed. Very little representation within the party.
Also women were consistently more likely to vote Tory than men throughout the 20th century when Tories only have a handful of female MPs.
If Labour are making such progress then we'll hopefully see the benefits in 10 or 15 years when they're next in power. That's great to hear.
In the meantime if you can tell me why Keith Vaz - a man I like to think of as the most corrupt politician of his generation - still gets plum jobs I'd be grateful. Because the only reason I can think of is the same sort of 'voters from the same background' assumptions you attribute to the Tories upthread.
99% of voters have never heard of Keith Vaz.
Also he's from an older school where some of what I am describing about the Tories was happening in the Labour Party in the 80s. But that's got more to do with left/right split Labour had back then. I think the right wanted him because he was on the right and the left could t organise to block him successfully because he was BME.
But whatever I said, taking one anecdotal example doesn't really refute my overall assertion.
I was just pointing out, as above, that both major parties can be guilty of tokenism when it suits them. It's the same reason Prescott was tolerated by Blair for so long after all.
But on Vaz I think he is effective regardless of whether or not he is corrupt. It's not tokenism. You can be corrupt and white.
We'll agree to differ on Keith Vaz. If his 'effectiveness' is what keeps him in his job then politics has far bigger problems.
PS-I think Chuka is fantastic along with a lot of other members of the shadow cabinet.
Although I think there's a different kind of hype amongst Conservative columnists about Javid. As a result of both his background and his business achievements.
He certainly seems like a completely different bad to Baroness Warsi but... we'll wait for the long game on this one.
Just because I've seen this story before doesn't mean it's not true this time. But the hype seems to be setting this guy up for a fall.
He's even more of a drum-pounding Thatcherite than Osborne is. Be interesting to see if he gains public popularity as a result of that. I'm not sure he will - he's got a background of being a ruthless trader after all; not the most PR-friendly background.
Rather than celebrating the first British Asian to become Secretary of State, and one from the most humble, working class background no less, they just spouting off about him being *too* successful! He made too much money in his last job or somesuch.
So whilst the Tories lead on the diversification of the top levels of British politics (again!), Labour just spout the politics of envy and division (again!).
Cue Jordan asking me to explain why I don't respond.
very clever *tips hat*
2 Labour MPs, admittedly, made some pretty petty remarks about it. But the idea that's `Labour's response` is a nonsense.
Didn't stop John Rentool (sic) saying it yesterday mind. God that man makes me wince.
He was going on about Help to Buy being for young people without rich parents who can't get to the £50k they need for a deposit, meaning it's for people to buy £500k homes. Madness.
who in no way look like they'd stab the shit out of you.
is that if you try to sell tickets at cost to fellow music lovers in the queue, they threaten to beat you up.
Salt of the earth.
"Perhaps you're mad keen on culture. Perhaps in between making all that money, you were hanging around galleries, theatres, cinemas, concert halls, comedy clubs, libraries, dance studios, painting classes. Perhaps you've seen how people manage on a shoe string, perhaps you've seen the awful conditions backstage in many theatres, perhaps you know about the crap wages that most people in the arts work with. Perhaps you know about the terrible crisis we have in libraries, depriving people of access to knowledge and culture."
literally half of it is just naming places or using words like 'rubbish' or 'awful'
At least we've still got the bingo
who have a keen interest or experience in the field they look after?
I'm sure he's spoken in the past about how his experience of being supported by his father-in-law's informed his management of the DWP.
But yeah, it's not especially common I don't think. I don't necessarily think it should be. I mean this gets levelled at Michael Gove a lot (no experience etc.) but I don't inherently think it's an issue. I mean it's difficult enough finding ministers competent enough to hold Cabinet positions (a justifiably niche job). Overlay that with the necessity for them to be `experts` in that field and... well, you'd have barely anyone in post.
It has to be noted that Michael Gove's lack of experience of education isn't the reason why he's dangerous; it's his pigheaded ignorance and dismissal of those WITH experience and expertise which is the issue.
Experience isn't necessarily critical, but knowing the limits of your own expertise is.
The problem with the current cabinet is that they ignore expert advise, or have devolved all policy-making to private-sector consultants with vested interests.
well I never!
He also apparently admired Mrs Thatcher at the age of 11. Imagine meeting an 11-yr-old who admired Margaret Thatcher. Imagine the depth of your sadness.
he was leafletting the campus saying the ERM was a bad idea. Fancy a pint mate?
Anyway he went on to earn £3m a year working at Deutsche Bank. Not sure who's got the last laugh here.